import.meta and TC39 process as a whole

[Matthew Phillips]

whatwg/loader was too big of a spec. It was floated around in various forms
for at least 5 years. Despite the very hard work of its champions it didn't
garner enough implementer support. I think history has proven now that
incremental improvements are more likely to succeed, so I'm happy to see
import() and import.meta be able to go through the process at a relatively
swift pace.

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Caridy Patiño <caridy at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dmitrii, as stated by the champion of import.meta in the issue, issues/2
> is one step of the process, in which we ask other members of the committee
> to review the spec text before it can be presented for stage 3. But you
> should be able to open other issues in that repo to voice your concerns
> about that proposal. Additionally, we have other channels, like this one,
> or via other members who can voice your concerns in upcoming meetings.
>
> As for the particular feature that you’re referencing, I suggest you to
> look at previous discussions about `import`, and why it is different (a
> hint: it is different because like super, it needs some contextual
> information). As one of the champions of the whatwg loader, I can tell you
> that we spent many hours trying to figure the best course of actions based
> on the initial loader spec, and we believe `import` is the right thing to
> do. import.meta is just a progression of that decision.
>
> /caridy
>
> On Aug 3, 2017, at 4:10 PM, Dmitrii Dimandt <dmitrii at dmitriid.com> wrote:
>
> Can anyone enlighten me as to how any input on features that are rushed
> into the standard works?
>
> What is the purpose of hosting TC39 on GitHub if no input is expected from
> anybody but TC39 members?
>
> Prime example: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-import-meta/issues/2
>
> Somehow it’s already in stage 2. Which means: The committee expects to
> devote time to examining the problem space, solutions and cross-cutting
> concerns
>
> Only reviews from committee members are expected, all other comments are
> locked out. If this makes it to stage 3 (and it will), it means: The
> committee expects the feature to be developed and eventually included in
> the standard
>
> So what’s the point of the whole process? Just shove whatever features you
> want/need onto the language and be done with it.
>
> Regarding import.meta. Instead of properly speccing out and designing a
> Loader (https://whatwg.github.io/loader/), the import keyword was turned
> into a not-really-a-keyword-not-really-a-function abomination. It quickly
> reached stage 3. Any and all concerns by people who discovered this and
> voiced their concerns were dismissed with no argument, and dynamic import
> is now everywhere.
>
> Now, since there has been no proper design of the feature, a `meta
> property` is just tacked onto the already confusing mess that is `import`.
> Expect it to reach stage 3 within a week or so, and then we are stuck with
> it forever.
>
> So, the question: why does TC39 even bother with the pretence of being
> transparent, o doing proper design on the language features etc.?
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>


-- 
Bitovi
Development | Design | Training | Open Source
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20170803/5cadfe75/attachment.html>